yes understand I had my large tree damaged on there and unfortunately had to re do it it is still on there but I've had it checked by Anthony Adolph this year and just got his report back luckily most of what I done is correct but now i'm stuck again with the kent side of my wilsons who he seems to think come from Cranbrook next where he's right as there is a baptism for Thomas born 1740 but he also mentioned checking settlement certificates and extracting parish records of Charing and little chart to see who is related to who they finally end up in Stepney where gg granddad George Wilson disappears, Anthony great but I cannot afford 425 each time so i'm back to my own research On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Caroline Bradford < caroline.bradford@btinternet.com> wrote: > > There are half a dozen people on Ancestry with your Wilsons in their tree > and > > this is the info they have! > > It is very dangerous to make the (common, but unfortunate) assumption that > facts are "proved" because they appear in online trees and that the more > trees the same "fact" appears on the more likely it is to be true! > > Sad to say, there are thousands of subscribers to Ancestry who believe that > the right way to build a family tree is to click away on suggested > "matches" > and attach chunks of lineage without any independent research or checks on > sourcing. In next to no time, one person's guesswork spreads like wildfire, > with novices assuming that "it must be true because lots of other people > have it in their tree". Six trees showing the same information does *not* > mean that six people have done proper research and come to the same > conclusion. > > Caroline > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KENT-ENG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- *WELCOME TO JUKIEVENN* * FAMILY HISTORY RESEARCHER AND HOME OF LONG COAT CHIHUAHUAS *

Yes I do agree that you can't just rely on what others have on their trees on Ancestry. However it is a good starting point! From there you hopefully know which village records to access and which years to hopefully lead you forward! I use them as a starting point not as an end! In my own case with my Bogg/Boggs family on my maternal grandmother's side it only seems to be me and a cousin who has done any work on them at all! Everyone just copies from us! Two generations back it is not only church records I'm trying to find but military ones. Both my great grandfather and great great grandfather were in the Royal Artillery. The 19th century ones are fine! They show the names of all the children born both here and abroad and of course there are the censuses. However I have had three searches done on the 18th century records at Kew and they don't list the names of John Boggs children! The most useful piece of information I had from the searches was where he was born in Magherafelt in Ireland in 1757 and through this Kent list I now know where he died, at Dover Castle buried at St. Mary's but I still don't know more than the names of six of his eleven children! All pre censuses and registration! If anyone has any brilliant ideas on how to find them please let me know! Best wishes Frances On 2 November 2013 17:18, June Wilson <junewilson46@gmail.com> wrote: > yes understand I had my large tree damaged on there and unfortunately had > to re do it it is still on there but I've had it checked by Anthony Adolph > this year and just got his report back luckily most of what I done is > correct but now i'm stuck again with the kent side of my wilsons who he > seems to think come from Cranbrook next where he's right as there is a > baptism for Thomas born 1740 but he also mentioned checking settlement > certificates and extracting parish records of Charing and little chart to > see who is related to who they finally end up in Stepney where gg granddad > George Wilson disappears, Anthony great but I cannot afford 425 each time > so i'm back to my own research > > > On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Caroline Bradford < > caroline.bradford@btinternet.com> wrote: > > > > There are half a dozen people on Ancestry with your Wilsons in their > tree > > and > > > this is the info they have! > > > > It is very dangerous to make the (common, but unfortunate) assumption > that > > facts are "proved" because they appear in online trees and that the more > > trees the same "fact" appears on the more likely it is to be true! > > > > Sad to say, there are thousands of subscribers to Ancestry who believe > that > > the right way to build a family tree is to click away on suggested > > "matches" > > and attach chunks of lineage without any independent research or checks > on > > sourcing. In next to no time, one person's guesswork spreads like > wildfire, > > with novices assuming that "it must be true because lots of other people > > have it in their tree". Six trees showing the same information does *not* > > mean that six people have done proper research and come to the same > > conclusion. > > > > Caroline > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > KENT-ENG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > -- > *WELCOME TO JUKIEVENN* > * > > > FAMILY HISTORY RESEARCHER > > AND HOME OF LONG COAT CHIHUAHUAS > * > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KENT-ENG-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- --- Regards Frances Lee